Chemical Weapons Working Group
P.O. Box 467 Berea, KY 40403
Phone: 606-986-7565 Fax: 606-986-2695
e-mail: kefwilli@acs.eku.edu
__________________________________________
for further information:
Craig Williams (606) 986-7565
Bob Schaeffer (617) 489-0461
For immediate release, March 2, 1995
CHEM. INCINERATION PROGRAM COSTS CLIMB ANOTHER $2.4 BILLION; GAO SAYS 29% ONE
YEAR RISE, 552% TOTAL HIKE, IS "UNDERSTATED"
A new Government Accounting Office (GAO) analysis concludes that the
Army's program to incinerate the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile will cost at
least $11.1 billion, a 29% increase from estimates made as recently as December
1993. The new total represents more than a five-fold growth in costs since
Congress authorized the Army's original $1.7 billion dollar proposal in 1985.
In a January, 1995, letter to Army Secretary Togo West, the GAO strongly
criticized the Army's methodology for estimating the costs of incineration,
particularly projections based on its prototype facility at Johnston Island in
the Pacific Ocean. GAO noted that the Army assumed future facilities would
operate around-the-clock even though Johnston Atoll averaged only 8 hours of
operation per day. Recently the Army filed a permit application to extend the
Johnston Atoll facility's life by five years, at an added cost of $640 million,
because it failed to complete its mission in its original permit period. This
brings the total budget of the Johnston Atoll prototype to $1.3 billion compared
with the Army original projection of $233 million.
The GAO letter was made public by the Chemical Weapons Working Group
(CWWG), an alliance of groups seeking alternatives to incineration. CWWG
spokesperson Craig Williams who lives near a proposed chemical weapons
incinerator in Kentucky explained, "Chemical weapons incineration is a runaway
spending program based on outdated technology. The GAO agrees that the Army's
projections are based on faulty data and wishful thinking. It's time to abandon
incineration and get on with developing safer, more cost-effective
alternatives.
The GAO report concluded," Because cost estimates to destroy the U.S.
chemical weapons stockpile continue to increase and the current $11 billion
estimate is understated, we recommend that you...develop revised program cost
estimates and schedules that accurately reflect actual experiences demonstrated
during sustained 24 hour per day operations..."
"The Army's blind devotion to artificial schedules over cost and
capability is obvious throughout the GAO report," Williams added. "A perfect
example is the expenditure of $17.7 million of taxpayer funds for machinery
which may never be used."
The GAO specifically criticizes the planned purchase of dunnage
incinerators noting, "the Army's strategy could result in acquisition of
unneeded equipment." Instead the report recommended the military "postpone
acquisition of dunnage incineration equipment until alternative waste management
practices are fully evaluated, and the operational effectiveness and need for
the current equipment are demonstrated."
Williams concluded, "If Congress is serious about budgetary concerns,
this is definitely a program they should closely examine. It's clearly our of
control, lacks accountability, and reeks of sweetheart deals between the Army
and its insider contractors."
Copies of the GAO analysis were sent to the Secretary of Defense as well
as to leaders of key Congressional policy and budget committees.
--30--
The GAO letter is available on request by calling Craig Williams at (606)
489-0461.
For information about specific U.S. chemical weapons sites, contact:
Blue Grass Depot, Kentucky Debra Hille (606) 986-7384
Anniston, Alabama Suzanne Marshall (205) 236-5234
Pueblo, Colorado Ross Vincent (719) 561-3117
Tooele, Utah Cindy King (801) 486-9848
Newport, Indiana Mark Hudson (317) 569-5887
Aberdeen, Maryland John Nunn (410) 778-5968
Pine Bluff, Arkansas Evelyn Yates (501) 536-7680
Umatilla, Oregon Karyn Jones (503) 567-6581
Johnston Atoll, Pacific Hayden Burgess (808) 696-5157